Verizon iPhone 4 Notes: Hotspot, Antenna, iOS 4.2.5, White iPhone 4 Images Removed

[chrmjenkins]

Some other comments argued that the antenna change is simply to accommodate CDMA specifications. If so, then are we to believe that the absence of 'Death-Grip' with this new antenna design is mere coincidence?

Death grip still affects the CDMA version. Anandtech saw a 15 dB attenuation under deathgrip.

 

[Wolfpup]

I soooo hope this comes to other carriers soon, but I'm not counting on it

Continue being annoyed by the use of "CDMA" to mean "Qualcom's system", since AT&T ALSO uses CDMA (UMTS).

 

[joeljjk11]

I don't know, I feel like Verizon kind of half-assed this whole thing, considering it is 6 month old technology that they are selling as basically new. Plus the fact that you can't talk and use data at the same time is horrendous. I do that like every day and it is a huge advantage of the iPhone. I'm staying with AT&T for sure.

 

[chrmjenkins]

I don't know, I feel like Verizon kind of half-assed this whole thing, considering it is 6 month old technology that they are selling as basically new. Plus the fact that you can't talk and use data at the same time is horrendous. I do that like every day and it is a huge advantage of the iPhone. I'm staying with AT&T for sure.

It may be conditions of their AT&T contract (i.e.) timed exclusivity. It also may just be this is how long it's taken since talks started in 2008.

The SVDO isn't surprising, as it would require a network (not tower) upgrade on Verizon's part when they are on the precipice of being able to offer it via LTE anyway.

 

[NKT]

It may be conditions of their AT&T contract (i.e.) timed exclusivity. It also may just be this is how long it's taken since talks started in 2008.

The SVDO isn't surprising, as it would require a network (not tower) upgrade on Verizon's part when they are on the precipice of being able to offer it via LTE anyway.

SVDO does not require network changes. It's dependent on the device.

 

[Wolfpup]

I don't know, I feel like Verizon kind of half-assed this whole thing, considering it is 6 month old technology that they are selling as basically new. Plus the fact that you can't talk and use data at the same time is horrendous. I do that like every day and it is a huge advantage of the iPhone. I'm staying with AT&T for sure.

Presumably the timing is an issue with Apple's AT&T contract, not something Verizon had direct control over. The voice/data issue is an issue with the tech they're using (although apparently texts don't count as data?). On the flip side their network's regarded as better.

I don't see what else they could have done. The iPhone 5 isn't out yet, this is presumably as soon as they could start selling them.

If they were selling 3G class hardware or something then yeah, that would be weird, but they're getting a version of Apple's newest product.

 

[chrmjenkins]

SVDO does not require network changes. It's dependent on the device.

It's both. The device must use the updated CDMA protocol that allows it, and the carrier must allow it on their back-end software (I presume Verizon has not done this due to lack of need).

 

[janstett]

classic verizon

they don't make money selling the phone but on the accessories. this is why all the accessories always changed and you couldn't buy a replacement after a year or so

One of the reasons I left Verizon after being a customer for over a decade was the nickel and diming of the V-cast store/apps/ringtones etc. Glad to see they've finally been broken.

Though in the case you mention (pun) it's Apple's redesign not Verizon's fault.

 

[NKT]

It's both. The device must use the updated CDMA protocol that allows it, and the carrier must allow it on their back-end software (I presume Verizon has not done this due to lack of need).

I'm not sure what you're talking about in regards to the backend software. It was my understanding that there's nothing to change/do.

http://www.cdg.org/resources/files/white_papers/Qualcomm_What's Next for CDMA_11NOV09.pdf

7 Simultaneous 1X Voice and EV-DO Data Improves the User Experience
Simultaneous 1X voice and EV-DO data, sometimes referred to as SVDO, is a new standard-independent device feature that significantly enhances the user experience without impacting the infrastructure side. In today’s networks, a device can be paged to receive 1X voice calls while in an EV-DO data session. However, no data connectivity is possible while in a voice call. SVDO establishes independent voice and data sessions using separate transmit and receive chains in the device, as shown in Fig. 11.

The SVDO feature can be effectively utilized by many applications. For example, users will be able to send emails or access the Web while on voice calls; phones with GPS can update maps or download real-time traffic information while on voice calls, etc.

The SVDO feature will be supported in new devices, and will work with 1X or 1X Advanced with EV-DO Rev. A or Rev. B. Qualcomm is planning to support the SVDO feature in all of its new EV-DO MSM chipset

 

[bergmef]

I'm not sure what you're talking about in regards to the backend software. It was my understanding that there's nothing to change/do.

http://www.cdg.org/resources/files/white_papers/Qualcomm_What's Next for CDMA_11NOV09.pdf

You are correct, it's a handset mod only.

Edit: With snapdragon supposedly having it built into the cpu, I'm curious to see if other handset makers do it. I would if I was them. It would make the iphone look bad. Unless apple made a deal with verizon to not allow it.

 

[NKT]

You are correct, it's a handset mod only.

Edit: With snapdragon supposedly having it built into the cpu, I'm curious to see if other handset makers do it. I would if I was them. It would make the iphone look bad. Unless apple made a deal with verizon to not allow it.

The only reason I can think of why they didn't use a SVDO-capable chipset would be battery life. Perhaps the dual tx/rx chains aren't battery friendly. That's why I think they would rather do VoRA. More efficient in that it's just a single data session from the device for both data and packetized voice. Plus it should be just a simple (relatively) software change on the device. I know VoRA has been tested and proven out so it's just a question of the change on the production devices.

 

[CamdenG]

I've been waiting three years for this. I own numerous apple products, but i'm unwilling to switch from Verizon, as it's the only network with signal in my area. I'm sure many who have been with Verizon for a while are used to it's inability to use data and voice simultaneously, and a new iPhone with the same "problem" wont disappoint. I also find the mobile hotspot very attractive. It certainly gives Verizon a competitive advantage over at@t.

 

[NKT]

The only reason I can think of why they didn't use a SVDO-capable chipset would be battery life. Perhaps the dual tx/rx chains aren't battery friendly. That's why I think they would rather do VoRA. More efficient in that it's just a single data session from the device for both data and packetized voice. Plus it should be just a simple (relatively) software change on the device. I know VoRA has been tested and proven out so it's just a question of the change on the production devices.

It's going to be VoRA, bank on that. The HTC Incredible is being used the upcoming internal trials. I'd say expect a commercial trial to start 2H2011.

 

[DCfilms]

Death grip still affects the CDMA version. Anandtech saw a 15 dB attenuation under deathgrip.

Thanks for the info. Do you have a link to it please?

 

[chrmjenkins]

I'm not sure what you're talking about in regards to the backend software. It was my understanding that there's nothing to change/do.

http://www.cdg.org/resources/files/white_papers/Qualcomm_What's Next for CDMA_11NOV09.pdf

You are correct, it's a handset mod only.

Edit: With snapdragon supposedly having it built into the cpu, I'm curious to see if other handset makers do it. I would if I was them. It would make the iphone look bad. Unless apple made a deal with verizon to not allow it.

The only reason I can think of why they didn't use a SVDO-capable chipset would be battery life. Perhaps the dual tx/rx chains aren't battery friendly. That's why I think they would rather do VoRA. More efficient in that it's just a single data session from the device for both data and packetized voice. Plus it should be just a simple (relatively) software change on the device. I know VoRA has been tested and proven out so it's just a question of the change on the production devices.

That's my point. If it were only a matter of chipset, why wouldn't it have been done by now? HTC's poor battery life obviously shows that that alone wouldn't suffice as a concern, and it would be a great distinguishing feature amongst the other CDMA phones available.

That's why I say it is not handset only. All of the literature I have ever seen talks about the handset side of things, but they never explicitly state that the carrier need make no changes to their infrastructure. Until I see that, and with no apparent good reason not to as a handset maker, I won't believe it's handset only.

Thanks for the info. Do you have a link to it please?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4125/understanding-the-verizon-iphone-4-announcement

I've got some more detail on the difference in antenna design on this new iPhone. As you can see from the pictures below, the good ol' death grip still attenuates signal strength on Verizon. Held normally I was getting a reading of -65 dBm on the Verizon iPhone, but in full on death grip the signal strength dropped to -83 dBm. That's in line with what we've seen on AT&T.

 

[NKT]

That's my point. If it were only a matter of chipset, why wouldn't it have been done by now? HTC's poor battery life obviously shows that that alone wouldn't suffice as a concern, and it would be a great distinguishing feature amongst the other CDMA phones available.

That's why I say it is not handset only. All of the literature I have ever seen talks about the handset side of things, but they never explicitly state that the carrier need make no changes to their infrastructure. Until I see that, and with no apparent good reason not to as a handset maker, I won't believe it's handset only.

The reason it hasn't been implemented sooner is because the availability of SVDO capable chips (or lack there of). The Qualcomm MSM7630 is the first one I know of that's made to work with SVDO.

With this said, I'm going to stop pushing SVDO as the solution. VZW is going VoRA.

 

[bergmef]

That's my point. If it were only a matter of chipset, why wouldn't it have been done by now? HTC's poor battery life obviously shows that that alone wouldn't suffice as a concern, and it would be a great distinguishing feature amongst the other CDMA phones available.

That's why I say it is not handset only. All of the literature I have ever seen talks about the handset side of things, but they never explicitly state that the carrier need make no changes to their infrastructure. Until I see that, and with no apparent good reason not to as a handset maker, I won't believe it's handset only.



http://www.anandtech.com/show/4125/understanding-the-verizon-iphone-4-announcement

So it's not a chip because someone hasn't done it?

From qualcomms website.

The SVDO feature will be supported in new devices, and will work with 1X or 1X Advanced with EV-DO Rev. A or Rev. B. Qualcomm is planning to support the SVDO feature in all of its new EV-DO MSM chipsets.

 

[chrmjenkins]

The reason it hasn't been implemented sooner is because the availability of SVDO capable chips (or lack there of). The Qualcomm MSM7630 is the first one I know of that's made to work with SVDO.

With this said, I'm going to stop pushing SVDO as the solution. VZW is going VoRA.

The CDMA Development Group (CDG) today announced that the specifications for CDMA2000® 1X Advanced have been completed and published by the 3rd Generation Partnership Project 2 (3GPP2). 1X Advanced allows 3G CDMA operators to significantly increase the voice capacity of their CDMA2000 1X network by taking advantage of several interference cancellation and radio link enhancements. Among these improvements are base transceiver station (BTS) interference cancellation, improved power control, early frame termination, and smart blanking. 1X Advanced enhancements can be integrated all at once or in phases, offering operators an evolutionary approach to expanding existing networks based on their individual market needs. The complete set of 1X Advanced enhancements can theoretically quadruple the voice capacity of CDMA2000 1X systems in the same 1.25 MHz of spectrum.

source

 

[NKT]

source

SVDO is independent of 1x Advanced.

 

[chrmjenkins]

SVDO is independent of 1x Advanced.

After digging deeper, my mistake. There were announced in conjunction, but are not part of the same standard.

So it's not a chip because someone hasn't done it?

From qualcomms website.

The SVDO feature will be supported in new devices, and will work with 1X or 1X Advanced with EV-DO Rev. A or Rev. B. Qualcomm is planning to support the SVDO feature in all of its new EV-DO MSM chipsets.

Over a year and half old. To my knowledge, those chipsets are now on the market.

 

[NKT]

After digging deeper, my mistake. There were announced in conjunction, but are not part of the same standard.

That is what I thought initially too.

It's all academic for me at this point anyways. SVDO isn't going to be used for the voice/data solution. I've recently found out that VoRA is where it's at.